Thursday, December 17, 2009

Moses and the Burning Bush

Hi there, and welcome to today's edition of, 'Amber picks your brains!' (and doesn't tell you why...)

I want to know, do you think that (in Exodus 3: 1-5) when God told Moses that 'this is holy ground' the *ground* was *actually* holy, or just that God wanted Moses to perceive it as such?

Here's the passage:

1 Now Moses was pasturing the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian; and he led the flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed. 3 So Moses said, "I must turn aside now and see this marvelous sight, why the bush is not burned up. 4 When the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here I am. 5 Then He said, "Do not come near here; remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground."

And, on a related note, what about Moses having to veil his face after having spoken to the Lord? (Exodus 34: 32-35):

32 Afterward all the sons of Israel came near, and he commanded them to do everything that the LORD had spoken to him on Mount Sinai. 33 When Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil over his face. 34 But whenever Moses went in before the LORD to speak with Him, he would take off the veil until he came out; and whenever he came out and spoke to the sons of Israel what he had been commanded, 35 the sons of Israel would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone. So Moses would replace the veil over his face until he went in to speak with Him.

What do you think it means that Moses' face shone? Why did it do that? Does it have anything to do with God's interaction with the physical world?

22 comments:

  1. What makes something holy? I've always thought the ground was holy because God wanted Moses to perceive it as holy. If Moses treated it as sacred and set-apart because God was there, then it becomes sacred and set-apart. I think the shining face is meant to communicate holiness and the perfection/awesomeness of God. In both cases, it's a physical reminder that God is separate and beyond us and should be treated that way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Did you know that the priests that served in the Tabernacle and the Temple did so 'bare foot'....

    Have me nose in Maccabees and Daniel - but I surfaced for two secs to add my two-eppance worth.. :0D

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am on to where these questions lead... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmmmmmmmm, maybe the ground was holy simply because God was there. His presence sanctifies things including the ground where He is.

    Perhaps Moses veiled his face because the brightness of being in God's presence would hurt the peoples' eyes or it would detract from the message Moses had to convey. Interesting that he didn't veil in front of God since many people believe they must cover their heads when they pray.

    Maybe Moses reflected God's brightness such as the moon gets light from the brightness of the sun. It is less, but it's still there.

    So where is this leading? :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sanil,

    Is this one of those, 'if a tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?' things?

    So, if Moses wasn't there, and God went into the bush, would the ground still be holy? Or does God require Moses to be there for the ground to be holy? Is it not holy merely because of God's Presence?

    Did God communicate some of His holiness to Moses in their interaction? So that his face shone?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ahavah,

    I did not remember that, but it makes perfect sense! :)

    'Have me nose in Maccabees and Daniel'

    I find reading works better with my face a *bit* farther from the page... ;)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anna,

    *forcibly squishes face into innocent look*

    I have no idea what you're talking about... :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Susanne,

    'Hmmmmmmmm, maybe the ground was holy simply because God was there. His presence sanctifies things including the ground where He is.'

    Yosh! That'd be what I'm getting at there, yes. :) But the question then is, once sanctified by the presence of God, is that ground forever more holy? Is His presence, His energy, always there?

    'Interesting that he didn't veil in front of God since many people believe they must cover their heads when they pray.'

    See, the 'veil' they're speaking of here involved covering the *face*. (I picture something like the Bedouin wrap, where you can just see the eyes) There's nothing said about whether or not he covered his head in the presence of God. (I assume that he did...)

    re: Moses' face - think back (or look) to my posts on the concept of deification.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I always learned that "holy" meant "set apart". According to Merriam-Webster, it means "worthy of complete devotion..." The difference in definition changes things a little, but I think it still works. My thought was that without Moses there to set it apart, it doesn't matter. So yeah, a tree falling in the forest. Being worthy of worship, same deal, in my opinion. If God didn't have lower beings to worship him, would he be holy? Sure, but what would it mean if he was all that existed? Without Moses there to note the difference, it doesn't matter.

    I believe God is everywhere, so his "presence" making it holy just doesn't make sense to me. What I think it represents in that moment is God asking for recognition so that Moses would pay attention and realize this as a divine command he could not ignore. I think God communicated his holiness THROUGH Moses, so that the Israelites would get the same message.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sanil,

    'My thought was that without Moses there to set it apart, it doesn't matter.'

    And yet, I think even without Moses standing there, it would have mattered. The holiness of the ground, or the burning bush is a fact, regardless of whether or not Moses was there. Was the ground holy before Moses noticed that the bush was on fire? Or does his perception define reality?

    'what would it mean if he was all that existed? Without Moses there to note the difference, it doesn't matter.'

    But there was a time when this was true, when He was all that existed. And yes, as you said, He was still holy, but as to what the means, what it was like, we have no concept, no way of knowing. Doesn't make it less true, or Him less holy. Without Moses there, we wouldn't know about it, but I don't think that's the same thing as it not mattering. Lots of stuff goes on that matters that we don't know about most of the time.

    'I believe God is everywhere, so his "presence" making it holy just doesn't make sense to me.'

    But there was clearly something different about this particular patch of ground. If it was no more holy than the rest of the planet, why would God make it a point to *tell* Moses he was on holy ground?

    If all He wanted was Moses' attention, I'm fairly certain a talking, burning bush that wasn't consumed would do the job. It'd certainly get *my* attention...

    ReplyDelete
  11. "If all He wanted was Moses' attention, I'm fairly certain a talking, burning bush that wasn't consumed would do the job. It'd certainly get *my* attention..."

    Ha! True, but I don't just mean attention. A burning house gets your attention. God commands respect. The burning bush might be scary, but would you obey a burning bush? Maybe, but to me pointing out that it's GOD sort of takes away the option of saying no. I know he HAD the option, but when you're looking at GOD, who is really going to say no and turn back around?

    I think we are working with different understandings of what holiness means and I'm not going to really understand what you're getting at unless/until you reveal what you're getting at. To me, it's all about setting God apart and recognizing how very different from us and greater than us he is. Without that moment of man staring at God (or rather, the closest we can even get to seeing God) and realizing we can't come there as we are, holiness doesn't mean anything. Does God recognize God's holiness?

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'God commands respect. The burning bush might be scary, but would you obey a burning bush?'

    I'd totally obey the talking, burning bush. Of course, chances are good I'd also listen to that really cool talking serpent, so, y'know, take that for what it's worth. :)

    'but when you're looking at GOD, who is really going to say no and turn back around?'

    Satan, (For the record, I misspelled it the first time as 'Stan' - this amuses me.) and a third of the hosts of heaven.

    'I think we are working with different understandings of what holiness means'

    I don't really think so - holy means, as you've said, set apart, sacred, worthy of worship and praise.

    'and I'm not going to really understand what you're getting at unless/until you reveal what you're getting at.'

    Relics.

    'To me, it's all about setting God apart and recognizing how very different from us and greater than us he is. Without that moment of man staring at God (or rather, the closest we can even get to seeing God) and realizing we can't come there as we are, holiness doesn't mean anything. Does God recognize God's holiness?'

    I think it has to do with all of that, but also, that God can, has, and does, interact with the physical world, and that that interaction changes (even elevates) the matter with which He interacts.

    Now, does God recognize His own holiness...my gut answer is 'yes'. All-knowing, y'know...

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Relics...I think it has to do with all of that, but also, that God can, has, and does, interact with the physical world, and that that interaction changes (even elevates) the matter with which He interacts."

    That's what I meant. I don't know what a relic is, and I've really never thought of it this way. Interesting!

    "Now, does God recognize His own holiness...my gut answer is 'yes'. All-knowing, y'know..."

    Ack, bad wording on my part. I meant, does God worship himself?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I *really* don't feel like working today, can you tell?

    'That's what I meant. I don't know what a relic is, and I've really never thought of it this way. Interesting!'

    Really? That's not covered in seminary? Even a little? *is boggled* I'm not just jerking around, I promise. Once I feel like I've gotten my thoughts into some sort of order, I'm going to do a post on relics. This post and the one about Elisha are connected to each other and to the concept of relics.

    'does God worship himself?'

    Ooh. Um...no. That'd be kind of silly.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Heh, a little. I know those days.

    "Really? That's not covered in seminary? Even a little? *is boggled* I'm not just jerking around, I promise."

    I'm not sure if it's not covered at all, or just hasn't been in the classes I've taken to this point. Maybe my worship class? Or history? I haven't gotten to that yet. It might also be a Catholic/Orthodox thing that a Methodist seminary just isn't going to bother with. I have no idea.

    I'm sure you're not just jerking around, and I'm excited to see your post on it when you get to it. :) You post on a lot of really cool things I've never come across before.

    "That'd be kind of silly."
    :D Exactly. That's what I meant by being on different pages. We have the same definition but for me I'm like "What do you mean holy w/o Moses seeing it that way? God is supposed to worship the bush?"

    ReplyDelete
  16. Boss isn't here, it's getting close to the holidays...all these things add up.

    Hmmm...I would have guessed it might be mentioned in history, or, is there a class on 'incorrect' doctrine? Like...'well, the Catholics believe a, b, c, and here's why that's not so.' Kind of thing. You're the only seminarian I've ever known, so I look to you for these sort of things. :)

    Why thank you. I try to be entertaining, at least. :)

    '"That'd be kind of silly."
    :D Exactly. That's what I meant by being on different pages. We have the same definition but for me I'm like "What do you mean holy w/o Moses seeing it that way? God is supposed to worship the bush?"'

    Oh, I see. And I'm thinking, just because someone doesn't recognize a thing as holy doesn't mean it *isn't*. For instance, Moses is there, bowing down before this bush, and Fred comes along. Fred shakes his head at this nutbar and moves along. Are the ground and the bush less holy for Fred not recognizing them as such? For not bowing down?

    And, if you *really* need someone outside of God to recognize something as holy for it to be holy...angels.

    ReplyDelete
  17. We're a pretty liberal seminary, they're not going to talk about "incorrect" doctrine. We do talk about varying interpretations, things that were declared heresies but which students at our school nevertheless believe, etc. It will probably come up more when I take church history 2. I sidestepped that class to learn about Julian of Norwich.

    Yeah, after your last explanation and just now reading the Elisha entry I get where you're going with it. Interesting questions! I will have to do some reading. :)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Am laughing at the devil named Stan.

    :-)

    Interesting discussion!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sanil,

    Yeah, I'd guess then, if it's ever going to be mentioned, it'll be mentioned in history. Why would you sidestep history? *loves history*

    Cool. I have made sense! At least enough for you to understand where I'm going...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Susanne,

    'Am laughing at the devil named Stan.

    :-)'

    Clearly, this means that all men named 'Stan' are suspect for being evil. *eyes them collectively*

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Why would you sidestep history?"

    To take MORE history! :D Actually, to take a history class w/a friend who really enjoys history and a class that I knew the professor really enjoyed and would get into. So I put off the general history class for later and got permission to take a more specific higher-level course.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sanil,

    Well fine, if it's for an awesome class... :)

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...